Which is worse, ignorance or apathy? I don't know and I don't care!

Hey CJames I come across like a lunatic, well because I am. But thats because I see what is going on in this country and can't understand why the American people aren't kicking these SOB's out of office. This is just one of the many things that We the People should be freaking out over.

"The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it." I guess you did not read that far down, kinda different from "shall not be infringed" as stated in the second amendment.

So Sealerman, the constitution makes provisions for when it may be suspended. Just like Lincoln did.

Two words, Jose Padilla. Leaves the country, joins a foreign army, and conspires against "public safety". Does the constitution say anything about your rights after you join a foreign army?

You must have been in the mood after getting charged up by Hanoi Jane and doofus Sean Penn in Washington.

You lefties are on a roll, but you have mistaken dissatisfaction with the war, for a desire to walk away and damage the US's security.

Time for the Democrats to put their money where their mouths are and solve the war by "talking" to Iran, Syria and N. Korea.

Why is Pelosi talking to Musharref instead of im-on-a-jihad of Iran?

Get Carter involved, after all he had great results with Iran. Good luck with that.

keepin' it real

I guess you did not read that far down, kinda different from "shall not be infringed" as stated in the second amendment.

What are you talking about?

Two words, Jose Padilla. Leaves the country, joins a foreign army, and conspires against "public safety". Does the constitution say anything about your rights after you join a foreign army?

LOL Jose Padilla, Stet you are so dense. Do a little reasch about him I wouldn't be suprised if they let him go because the Justice deptment F'ed that case up so much. The bottom line Stet is if the Padilla case is so open and shut why didn't they bring him to trail years ago?

You lefties are on a roll

LOL The Attorney General says the Constitution doesn't guaranteed Habeas Corpus and you say Lefties are on a roll. So typical of a Neo-Con. I like how you bring Carter and Pelosi into this as if they had anything to do with it. Stet close your eyes and imagine Janet Reno had said those thing to Congress, I'm sure you would have supported her as well, NOT. So Stet do you think the constitution guaranteeds Habeas Corps to all citizens?

Without Habeas Corpus, the Constitution and Bill of rights kinda becomes moot. Looks like first step to Dictatorship, that Bush talks about , just a little too much.
In my opinion, 9/11 was a setup, just for this purpose..Look around , things are happening that didn't happen in ww2.

I posted my following comments in another thread:

The dilemma which the AG is attempting to create is whether HC is a right by Statute or by the Constitution.

If by Statute, then Congress can easily change it. If by the Constitution, then it becomes much more difficult to modify.

This is not a Left or Right issue. Lincoln abolished HC and Congress reinstated it two years later. The Constitution refers to taking HC away in the event of a rebellion or an invasion. The AG is implying that unless the Constitution specifically grants the right, then it may not exist, never mind that it says such right can only be taken away in the event of a rebellion of invasion. As Arlen Specter said to the AG, ".....you may betreading on your interdiction and violating common sense, Mr. Attorney General."

basically Bush wants to be able to detain whoever he wants, wherever he wants, for as long as he wants??? WITHOUT a trial date? That's not exactly what "democracy" is about... unfortunately we aren't living in a democracy. Anyone who believes that we are in a democratic society needs to open their eyes. 2-party system.... electoral college... GWB.... heh.. no.

I love the way you lefties want to give rights that belong only to US citizens to enemy combatants. Padilla may have been a citizen, but when he went overseas and joined a foreign army, he relinquished his citizenship and the rights bestowed. Doesn't the constitution say something about that?

The way the left wants to defend (to win) the terrorists is exactly why we do this. It is a war, not an OJ game. Just look at Ramsey Clarke defending Sadaam. He'd defend Pol Pot too, but only if Pol Pot was fighting to destroy the US.

Anti capitalist, anti establishment, anti American. And you are free to be that way, that is until you join a foreign army with which we are at war.

BREAKING NEWS

Hillary demands Bush be out of Iraq, before the end of his term. Brilliant, the left does everything possible to benefit the enemy, and as a result the enemy is emboldened and the war drags out. But they don't want to deal with the real consequences. Guess what, it is everybody's war, not just Bush's. And I look forward to how they deal with the war so much "better". I don't think they will be in power for long, if at all. But if Hildebeast becomes prez, that is ok with me too.

I don't want to give the terrorists NY lawyers, I want to kill them. Why do you want to give them civilian trials with all the games?

This same stuff was said before and during WW2, nothing really new as history is repeating itself.

keepin' it real

unfortunately we aren't living in a democracy.

You are correct Trex, America is a represenative Republic.

"The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it."

Stet H.C. isn't a "privilege" it's a right and the founders felt it was such a no brainer that they did not feel they had to put it in the Constitution. But they did realize that one day a Lunatic maybe voted into office by poorly informed citizens so they put in the only 2 reasons that the right of H.C. suspended.

Time for the Democrats to put their money where their mouths are and solve the war by "talking" to Iran, Syria and N. Korea.

I can't wait till we Impeach these SOB's and get some adults to run the Country.

keepin' it real

I asked Stet this question,

So Stet do you think the constitution guaranteeds Habeas Corps to all citizens?

And Stet gives this answer,

I see, rights implied and expected that are not really there. Hmmm...

So Stet does not believe the Constitution guaranteeds the Right of Habeas Corpus. So this means he thinks the U.S. Gov't can arrest a citizen without cause and hold then for as long as they want. Seems like Stet and his ilk have a real supprise for the rest of us if will allow them to continue in power.

So when Clinton was bombing Serbia, Iraq, Sudan, he wasn't making constant war?

Gee Stet what a suprise bring up Clinton while trying to defend Bush, how original.The Conservative ideology is DEAD may it R.I.P..

fwiw..

Yes...I'm back...

This has devolved into another thread showing the duration of attention span possessed by most Americans...Many actually now believe this war is about oil...It's not.
Most anti-war drones believe Bush acted unilaterally..he didn't.
Most anti war drones have already forgotten the 3000 people who died on 9/11...I haven't.
Does Bush suck...yes he does.

This has devolved into another thread showing the duration of attention span possessed by most Americans...Many actually now believe this war is about oil...It's not.

LOL drdot, you're a lunatic, your post show you didn't even watch the video clip. How has this devolved from talking about the fact that the A.G of the U.S. doesn't think the right to a trail is guaranteed in very citizen by the Constitution.

Most anti-war drones believe Bush acted unilaterally..he didn't.
Most anti war drones have already forgotten the 3000 people who died on 9/11...I haven't.

Gee who could argue with that?Ok so now you're a DRONE if you think the war with Iraq is wrong.

Does Bush suck...yes he does.

Wow that was deep drdot, care to elaborate. Oh wait I know he sucks because he hasn't attacked Iran yet right.